DOCSLIB.ORG

Choices in Relationships an Introduction to Marriage, Family, and Diversity 1 Copy, Not May Your Choices Reflect Your Hopes, Donot Your Fears

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Choices in Relationships an Introduction to Marriage, Family, and Diversity 1 Copy, Not May Your Choices Reflect Your Hopes, Donot Your Fears distribute or Chesnot/Getty Images Europe post, Choices in Relationships An Introduction to Marriage, Family, and Diversity 1 copy, not May your choices reflect your hopes, Donot your fears. —Nelson Mandela Copyright ©2021 by SAGE Publications, Inc. This work may not be reproduced or distributed in any form or by any means without express written permission of the publisher. 2 CHOICES IN RELATIONSHIPS Learning Objectives 1.1. Review facts about a “choices” view of relationships and various influences on those “choices” 1.2. Describe the theoretical frameworks for studying marriage and the family 1.3. Identify the elements, benefits, and types of marriage relationships 1.4. Understand the definition and types of family 1.5. Explain the distinction between marriage and family 1.6. Summarize the research process and its caveats 1.7. Identify changes in marriage and the family in the future With all the swiping and talk Making the right choices in your relationships, Master the content at edge.sagepub.com/knox13e of Tinder, “friends with ben- including marriage and family, is critical to your health, happiness, and sense of well-being. Your efits,” and cohabitation, one times of greatest elation and sadness will be in refer- wonders why a text and course about marriage and the ence to your love relationships. family? Are marriage and family done for? No. All polls The central theme ofdistribute this text is choices in and surveys provide essentially the same finding—that relationships. Although we will make over 100 rela- most individuals seek a marital and family context for tionship decisions, among the most important are whether to marry,or whom to marry, when to marry, their adult lifestyle (James-Kangal et al., 2018). whether to have children, whether to remain emo- The reason? Marriage and family are the contexts of tionally and sexually faithful to one’s partner, and sustained emotional connections. Thus, this text focuses whether to protect oneself from sexually transmit- ted infections and unwanted pregnancy. Though on human connections and relationship choices. Few structural and cultural influences are operative, experiences are more important. It is something all of a choices framework emphasizes that individuals us have in common—the search for meaningful love post,have some control over their relationship destiny connections which result from deliberate, thoughtful, by making deliberate choices to initiate, nurture, or considered choices in one’s relationships. Many of terminate intimate relationships. these intense and sustained love relationships end up in marriage and having a family—the bedrock of society. All Facts About Choices in individuals were born into a family—however one defines Relationships this concept—and most will end up in a family of their own. copy, The facts to keep in mind when making relationship “Have a happy marriage” remains the top value reported choices include the following: by 13,119 undergraduates with 44% selecting this value, 32% choosing “have career I love,” and 21% opting for “have Not to Decide Is to Decide financial security” (Hallnot & Knox, 2019). In this chapter we Not making a decision is a decision by default. If review the definitions, types, and frameworks for viewing you are sexually active and decide not to use a con- marriage and the family. We begin with the principle dom, you have made a decision to increase your risk for an unwanted pregnancy and possibly con- framework for this text—choices in relationships. Do tracting a sexually transmitted infection (STI). If you don’t make a deliberate choice to end a rela- tionship that is unfulfilling or going nowhere, you CHOICES IN have made a choice to continue that relationship and eliminate the possibility of getting into a more RELATIONSHIPS— positive and flourishing relationship. If you don’t VIEW OF THE TEXT make a decision to be faithful to your partner, you have made a decision to be vulnerable to cheating. Whatever your relationship goal, in this text we See the Personal Choices section for more exam- encourage a proactive approach of taking charge ples of taking charge of your life by making delib- of your life and making wise relationship choices. erate choices. Copyright ©2021 by SAGE Publications, Inc. This work may not be reproduced or distributed in any form or by any means without express written permission of the publisher. CHAPTER 1 Choices IN Relationships 3 and an upside. If you decide to hook up with some- one, you may enjoy the sexual excitement, but you may feel regretful in the morning and decide that the night will not result in a relationship. If you decide to marry, you will give up your freedom to pursue other emotional or sexual relationships or both. But, your marriage may result in a stable lifetime of shared memories. Any partner that you select will also have char- acteristics that must be viewed as a trade-off. One woman noted of her partner, “he doesn’t do text mes- saging or e-mail. he doesn’t even know how to turn on a computer. But he knows how to build a house, Relationships thrive on unique experiences like sharing the plant a garden, and fix a car. and he loves me. sunset together. Courtesy of Trevor Werb trade-offs I’m willing to make.” Some Choices Require Correction If your feet don’t move, you’ll never get there. Ann Marie Antenucci, Some of our choices, although they seem correct at recalling the words of her immigrant grandmother the time that we make them, turn out to be disasters. Once we realize that a choice has consistently nega- tive consequences,distribute it is important to stop defending Action Must Follow a Choice it, make new choices, and move forward. Otherwise, Making a decision but not acting on it is tantamount we remain consistently locked into continued nega- to no decision at all. You must pull the trigger. If you tive outcomes for a “bad” choice. The analogy is that decide to only have safe sex, you must buy condoms, no matteror how far you have gone down the wrong have them available, and use them. road, you can always turn back. Choices Involve Trade-Offs It all depends on how we look at things, and not on how By making one choice, you relinquish others. Every they are in themselves. Carl G. Jung, psychoanalyst relationship choice you make will have a downsidepost, PERSONAL CHOICES Relationshipcopy, Choices—Deliberately or by Default? It is a myth that you can avoid making relationship If you do not make a decision to delay having decisions, because by default, not making a decision intercourse, you have made a decision to have is a decision. Some examples follow: intercourse early in a relationship. Research suggests less regret with delaying the first If younot don’t make a decision to pursue a intercourse (Farvid & Braun, 2017). relationship with a particular person, you have If you are sexually active and do not make a made a decision (by default) not to have a decision to use birth control or a condom, you relationship with that person. have made a decision to expose yourself to Do If you do not decide to do the things that are getting pregnant or to contracting an STI. necessary to improve your current relationship, Throughout the text, as we discuss various you have made a decision to let the relationship relationship choices, consider that you automatically slowly disintegrate. make a choice by being inactive—that not to make If you do not make a decision to be faithful to a choice is to make one. We encourage a proactive your partner, you have made a decision to be style whereby you make deliberate relationship open to situations and relationships which may choices. ● result in infidelity. Copyright ©2021 by SAGE Publications, Inc. This work may not be reproduced or distributed in any form or by any means without express written permission of the publisher. 4 CHOICES IN RELATIONSHIPS TABLE 1.1 Five Generations in Recent History PERCENTAGE OF THE BORN MAJOR LIFE EVENTS HABITS U.S. POPULATION Traditionalists/Silent (1913-1945) Years of the Great Traditional values 10% Generation Depression, World War II veterans and civilians. Baby Boomers (1946-1964) Children of WWII Questioning of traditional 23% Traditionalists. values. Generation X (1965-1979) Generation of change, Children of boomers. 20% MTV, AIDS, diversity. Generation Y (1980-1996) Boomerang generation, Loyalty to corporations 23% (Millennials) delay marriage. is gone, frequent job changes. Generation Z (1997-2012) Grew up in context of Also known as Plurals, 24% terrorism. Skyrocketing App Generation, college costs. Homelanders, “Always on” Choices Include Selecting a Positive or a Choices of Generationdistribute Y Negative View Generations vary and social scientists study and As Thomas Edison progressed toward inventing the compare these cohorts, focusing on their habits and light bulb, he said, “I have not failed. I have found ten how they differ fromor previous generations (see Table thousand ways that won’t work.” 1.1). Much attention has been given to Generation In spite of an unfortunate event in your life, you Y, more commonly known as millennials, and their can choose to see the bright side. Regardless of your choices. Numbering about 80 million, they represent circumstances, you can opt for viewing a situation in 23% of the U.S. population. The choices of this positive terms. A partner breaking up with you due generation reveal a focus on enjoyment and flexibility. to lack of love can be viewed as an opportunity to Rather than fixating on marriage, they “hang out,” become involved in a new, mutual, love relationship. post,“hook up,” and live together.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • CO U S I N M a R R I a G E Must Ultimately Be Deduced from The
    N I N E GI LYA K CO U S I N MA R R I A G E A N D MO R G A N’S HY P O T H E S I S1 [113–129; 155–159, 168–185, 159–167; 219–235; 114–124] C O U S I N M A R R I A G E must ultimately be deduced from the realization that close blood marriage between close blood relatives is harmful. We have seen that primitive man, for a number of reasons (be they religious conservatism, ideas associated with ances- tor worship, or the desire for a peaceful organization of marriage), did not pass direct- ly from marriage between brother and sister to marriage between remote relations or strangers. Our goal in this chapter is to trace the genetic link between the Gilyak system and that of Australia, to see how the Gilyak diverged from the Australian sys- tem at the stage when marriage between two-sided first-cousins first began to come into disrepute [114].2 The great transformation towards exogamous marriage took place with extrem e slowness. Thus, as is the case even now among the Australian natives, the first form of exogamy adopted was that of enforced marriage between children of brother and sister. As the marriages occur uniformly from generation to generation, the group, in matrimonial orde r , is necessarily divided into two moieties which, following the gen- erations, exchange their women by cross-cousin marriage. In its application to indi- vidual families, this system requires that the son of a brother marry the latter’s sis- ter’s daughter, and conversely, the son of a sister, the latter’s brother’s daughter.
    [Show full text]
  • Understanding Marriage and Families Across Time and Place M01 ESHL8740 12 SE C01.QXD 9/14/09 5:28 PM Page 3
    M01_ESHL8740_12_SE_C01.QXD 9/14/09 5:28 PM Page 2 part I Understanding Marriage and Families across Time and Place M01_ESHL8740_12_SE_C01.QXD 9/14/09 5:28 PM Page 3 chapter 1 Defining the Family Institutional and Disciplinary Concerns Case Example What Is a Family? Is There a Universal Standard? What Do Contemporary Families Look Like? Ross and Janet have been married more than forty-seven years. They have two chil- dren, a daughter-in-law and a son-in-law, and four grandsons. Few would dispute the notion that all these members are part of a common kinship group because all are related by birth or marriage. The three couples involved each got engaged, made a public announcement of their wedding plans, got married in a religious ceremony, and moved to separate residences, and each female accepted her husband’s last name. Few would question that each of these groups of couples with their children constitutes a family, although a question remains as to whether they are a single family unit or multiple family units. More difficult to classify are the families of Vernon and Jeanne and their chil- dren. Married for more than twenty years, Vernon and Jeanne had four children whom have had vastly different family experiences. Their oldest son, John, moved into a new addition to his parents’ house when he was married and continues to live there with his wife and three children. Are John, his wife, and his children a separate family unit, or are they part of Vernon and Jeanne’s family unit? The second child, Sonia, pursued a career in marketing and never married.
    [Show full text]
  • Men's Endorsement of Monogamy: the Role of Gendered Relationship
    Men’s Endorsement of Monogamy: The Role of Gendered Relationship Scripts on Beliefs about Committed Relationships, Love, and Romance by Amy Catherine Moors A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy (Psychology and Women’s Studies) in The University of Michigan 2015 Doctoral Committee: Associate Professor Terri D. Conley, Chair Assistant Professor Allison N. Earl Associate Professor Robin S. Edelstein Professor Deborah Keller-Cohen © Amy C. Moors 2015 DEDICATION To Susan J. Moors and Richard J. Moors for both of your unwavering support, encouragement, and optimism since 1984. And, to Daniel Ethan Gosnell for your sage advice, smiling face, and willingness to move from the east coast to the midwest. You’re my dreamboat. ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I have received support, advice, mentorship, and encouragement from a great number of individuals. I would have ended up on a different path if it was not for my undergraduate mentors at William Paterson University: Katherine Makarec, Elizabeth Haines, Neil Kressel, Jan Pinkston, and Bruce Diamond. I would also like to thank Thomas Toppino for his mentorship and passing down his careful empirical eye to me during my time at Villanova University. My dissertation committee of Terri Conley (my advisor), Robin Edelstein, Debby Keller-Cohen, and Ali Earl have provided me with excellent support and constructive critique as I moved from ideas to completed studies. I am truly grateful for this all-star committee. In addition, Terri, Robin, and Abby Stewart have been deeply influential throughout my six years of training; I have grown in all aspects of scholarship from them.
    [Show full text]
  • The Lived Experience of Monogamy Among Gay Men in Monogamous Relationships
    Walden University ScholarWorks Walden Dissertations and Doctoral Studies Walden Dissertations and Doctoral Studies Collection 2020 The Lived Experience of Monogamy Among Gay Men in Monogamous Relationships Kellie L. Barton Walden University Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.waldenu.edu/dissertations Part of the Clinical Psychology Commons This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Walden Dissertations and Doctoral Studies Collection at ScholarWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in Walden Dissertations and Doctoral Studies by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Walden University College of Social and Behavioral Sciences This is to certify that the doctoral dissertation by Kellie Barton has been found to be complete and satisfactory in all respects, and that any and all revisions required by the review committee have been made. Review Committee Dr. Chet Lesniak, Committee Chairperson, Psychology Faculty Dr. Scott Friedman, Committee Member, Psychology Faculty Dr. Susan Marcus, University Reviewer, Psychology Faculty Chief Academic Officer and Provost Sue Subocz, Ph.D. Walden University 2020 Abstract The Lived Experience of Monogamy Among Gay Men in Monogamous Relationships by Kellie Barton MS, Walden University, 2012 BS, University of Phoenix, 2010 Dissertation Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Clinical Psychology Walden University February 2020 Abstract Research on male gay relationships spans more than 50 years, and the focus of most of this research has been on understanding the development processes, consequences, and risk factors of nonmonogamous relationships. Few researchers have explored the nature and meaning of monogamy in the male gay community.
    [Show full text]
  • Marriage Outlaws: Regulating Polygamy in America
    Faucon_jci (Do Not Delete) 1/6/2015 3:10 PM Marriage Outlaws: Regulating Polygamy in America CASEY E. FAUCON* Polygamist families in America live as outlaws on the margins of society. While the insular groups living in and around Utah are recognized by mainstream society, Muslim polygamists (including African‐American polygamists) living primarily along the East Coast are much less familiar. Despite the positive social justifications that support polygamous marriage recognition, the practice remains taboo in the eyes of the law. Second and third polygamous wives are left without any legal recognition or protection. Some legal scholars argue that states should recognize and regulate polygamous marriage, specifically by borrowing from business entity models to draft default rules that strive for equal bargaining power and contract‐based, negotiated rights. Any regulatory proposal, however, must both fashion rules that are applicable to an American legal system, and attract religious polygamists to regulation by focusing on the religious impetus and social concerns behind polygamous marriage practices. This Article sets out a substantive and procedural process to regulate religious polygamous marriages. This proposal addresses concerns about equality and also reflects the religious and as‐practiced realities of polygamy in the United States. INTRODUCTION Up to 150,000 polygamists live in the United States as outlaws on the margins of society.1 Although every state prohibits and criminalizes polygamy,2 Copyright © 2014 by Casey E. Faucon. * Casey E. Faucon is the 2013‐2015 William H. Hastie Fellow at the University of Wisconsin Law School. J.D./D.C.L., LSU Paul M. Hebert School of Law.
    [Show full text]
  • Lekking Mating Systems Monogamy
    Petrie et al. 1991 Lekking •Black Grouse •Yearly variation in lek sites 120 years after Darwin suggested female From Scandinavian word ‘lek’ for “play” choice could maintain elaborate plumage: Evidence in support of Hot Spot: Males defend small territories of no resource value •Multiple species lekking near river confluences First demonstration of female preference •Typically clumped in a small display area for elaborate plumage in males. Females arrive there solely for finding mates Evidence against female preference hypothesis: •Uganda kob (an antelope that leks) Underlying Theory: Why do this? Bradbury’s hypothesis •Operational Sex Ratio across leks is fairly •Intersexual Selection •Should be favored in species with wide-ranging constant Specific Hypotheses foraging ecology 1. Female mate choice depends on male plumage •Unpredictable, temporally variable food However, as with all things ecological: train characteristics (intersexual sel’n hyp.) versus sources (tropical fruits ripening at different Depends heavily on the species. 2. Certain plumage train characteristics confer a times on different trees) •Ruffs (type of sandpiper) exhibit competitive advantage to males (intrasexual sel’n behavior supporting all three hypothesis) Big Question: Why do males congregate in small areas? hypotheses Not mutually exclusive hypotheses •Three Hypotheses: •Located near small ponds on elevated ground •“Hot Spot” hypothesis •Females prefer groups with at least 5 displayers Previous Studies (Two) •“Hot Shot” hypothesis •Low-ranking males choose to display near •Experimental manipulations •Female preference hypothesis dominant males •Demo’d increased mating success but didn’t clearly document the mechanism Evidence for “Hot Shot” •Great snipes (European sandpipers) Observational Study •Removal of dominant males caused desertion •One lek at Whipsnade Zoological Park (England) by nearby subordinates •Removal of subordinates created rapidly-filled vacancies Back to Peacocks..
    [Show full text]
  • Tibetan Fraternal Polyandry: a Review of Its Advantages and Breakdown
    University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln Nebraska Anthropologist Anthropology, Department of 1997 Tibetan Fraternal Polyandry: A Review of its Advantages and Breakdown Jeff Willett Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/nebanthro Part of the Anthropology Commons Willett, Jeff, "Tibetan Fraternal Polyandry: A Review of its Advantages and Breakdown" (1997). Nebraska Anthropologist. 113. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/nebanthro/113 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Anthropology, Department of at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in Nebraska Anthropologist by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. Tibetan Fraternal Polyandry: A Review of its Advantages and Breakdown Jeff Willett ·Polyandry is primarily selected caused by the younger brothers of the not for bread and butter motives - household, because of unhappiness fear of starvation in a difficult with their spouse, their lower environment - but rather primarily reproductive success than older for the Tibetan equivalent of brothers, a desire for personal oysters, champagne, and social autonomy, and difficulty in maintaining a esteem.- Melvyn C. Goldstein (1978). large household. Goldstein (1981) also finds that brothers are more likely to The fraternal polyandry marriage leave polyandrous marriages when relationship of Tibet is widely considered unexpected economic opportunities to be a means of preventing the division arise. of a family's resources among its male heirs. As a family resource preservation Tibetan Fraternal Polyandry strategy, Tibetan polyandry Fraternal polyandry is the accomplishes the same goal of the preferred form of marriage among the European stem family system, but in a culturally Tibetan villages where Levine very different way.
    [Show full text]
  • Marten Stol WOMEN in the ANCIENT NEAR EAST
    Marten Stol WOMEN IN THE ANCIENT NEAR EAST Marten Stol Women in the Ancient Near East Marten Stol Women in the Ancient Near East Translated by Helen and Mervyn Richardson ISBN 978-1-61451-323-0 e-ISBN (PDF) 978-1-61451-263-9 e-ISBN (EPUB) 978-1-5015-0021-3 This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial- NoDerivs 3.0 License. For details go to http://creativecommons.org/licenses/ by-nc-nd/3.0/ Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data A CIP catalog record for this book has been applied for at the Library of Congress. Bibliographic information published by the Deutsche Nationalbibliothek The Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliografie; detailed bibliographic data are available on the Internet at http://dnb.dnb.de. Original edition: Vrouwen van Babylon. Prinsessen, priesteressen, prostituees in de bakermat van de cultuur. Uitgeverij Kok, Utrecht (2012). Translated by Helen and Mervyn Richardson © 2016 Walter de Gruyter Inc., Boston/Berlin Cover Image: Marten Stol Typesetting: Dörlemann Satz GmbH & Co. KG, Lemförde Printing and binding: cpi books GmbH, Leck ♾ Printed on acid-free paper Printed in Germany www.degruyter.com Table of Contents Introduction 1 Map 5 1 Her outward appearance 7 1.1 Phases of life 7 1.2 The girl 10 1.3 The virgin 13 1.4 Women’s clothing 17 1.5 Cosmetics and beauty 47 1.6 The language of women 56 1.7 Women’s names 58 2 Marriage 60 2.1 Preparations 62 2.2 Age for marrying 66 2.3 Regulations 67 2.4 The betrothal 72 2.5 The wedding 93 2.6
    [Show full text]
  • From Romantic Jealousy to Sympathetic Joy: Monogamy, Polyamory, and Beyond Jorge N
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by California Institute of Integral Studies libraries Digital Commons @ CIIS International Journal of Transpersonal Studies Advance Publication Archive 2019 From Romantic Jealousy to Sympathetic Joy: Monogamy, Polyamory, and Beyond Jorge N. Ferrer Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.ciis.edu/advance-archive Part of the Feminist, Gender, and Sexuality Studies Commons, Philosophy Commons, Religion Commons, and the Transpersonal Psychology Commons From Romantic Jealousy to Sympathetic Joy: Monogamy, Polyamory, and Beyond Jorge N. Ferrer. Cailornia Institute of Integral Studies San Francisco, CA, USA This paper explores how the extension of contemplative qualities to intimate relationships can transform human sexual/emotional responses and relationship choices. The paper reviews contemporary findings from the field of evolutionary psychology on the twin origins of jealousy and monogamy, argues for the possibility to transform jealousy into sympathetic joy (or compersion), addresses the common objections against polyamory (or nonmonogamy), and challenges the culturally prevalent belief that the only spiritually correct sexual options are either celibacy or (lifelong or serial) monogamy. To conclude, it is suggested that the cultivation of sympathetic joy in intimate bonds can pave the way to overcome the problematic dichotomy between monogamy and polyamory, grounding individuals in a radical openness to the dynamic unfolding of life
    [Show full text]
  • A Grounded Theory of How Mixed Orientation Married
    “Making it Work”: A Grounded Theory of How Mixed Orientation Married Couples Commit, Sexually Identify, and Gender Themselves Christian Edward Jordal Dissertation submitted to the Faculty of Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy In Human Development Katherine R. Allen April L. Few-Demo Christine E. Kaestle Margaret L. Keeling April 27, 2011 Blacksburg, Virginia Keywords: Bisexuality; gender; marital commitment; mixed orientation marriage Abstract Married bisexuals who come out to their heterosexual partners do not invariably divorce. This qualitative study included 14 intact, mixed orientation married couples. The mean marriage duration was 14.5 years, and the mean time since the bisexual spouse had come out was 7.9 years. The research focused the negotiation processes around three constructs: (a) sexual identity; (b) gender identity; and (c) marital commitment. Dyadic interviews were used to generate a grounded theory of the identity and commitment negotiation processes occurring among intact mixed orientation married couples. The findings revealed two sexual identity trajectories: Bisexuals who identify before marriage and reemerge within marriage; or bisexuals who do not identity before marriage but who emerge from within marriage. Two gender identity processes were reported: gender non-conformity and deliberate gender conformity. Finally, two negotiation processes around marital commitment were found: (a) closed marital commitment, and (b) open marital commitment. Closed marital commitment was defined as monogamous. Open marital commitment had four subtypes: (a) monogamous with the option to open; (b) open on one side (i.e., the bisexual spouse was or had the option to establish a tertiary relationship outside the marriage); (c) open on both sides or polyamorous; and (d) third-person inclusive (i.e.
    [Show full text]
  • Compulsory Monogamy and Polyamorous Existence Elizabeth Emens
    University of Chicago Law School Chicago Unbound Public Law and Legal Theory Working Papers Working Papers 2004 Monogamy's Law: Compulsory Monogamy and Polyamorous Existence Elizabeth Emens Follow this and additional works at: https://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/ public_law_and_legal_theory Part of the Law Commons Chicago Unbound includes both works in progress and final versions of articles. Please be aware that a more recent version of this article may be available on Chicago Unbound, SSRN or elsewhere. Recommended Citation Elizabeth Emens, "Monogamy's Law: Compulsory Monogamy and Polyamorous Existence" (University of Chicago Public Law & Legal Theory Working Paper No. 58, 2004). This Working Paper is brought to you for free and open access by the Working Papers at Chicago Unbound. It has been accepted for inclusion in Public Law and Legal Theory Working Papers by an authorized administrator of Chicago Unbound. For more information, please contact [email protected]. CHICAGO PUBLIC LAW AND LEGAL THEORY WORKING PAPER NO. 58 MONOGAMY’S LAW: COMPULSORY MONOGAMY AND POLYAMOROUS EXISTENCE Elizabeth F. Emens THE LAW SCHOOL THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO February 2003 This paper can be downloaded without charge at http://www.law.uchicago.edu/academics/publiclaw/index.html and at The Social Science Research Network Electronic Paper Collection: http://ssrn.com/abstract_id=506242 1 MONOGAMY’S LAW: COMPULSORY MONOGAMY AND POLYAMOROUS EXISTENCE 29 N.Y.U. REVIEW OF LAW & SOCIAL CHANGE (forthcoming 2004) Elizabeth F. Emens† Work-in-progress: Please do not cite or quote without the author’s permission. I. INTRODUCTION II. COMPULSORY MONOGAMY A. MONOGAMY’S MANDATE 1. THE WESTERN ROMANCE TRADITION 2.
    [Show full text]
  • Counseling the Polyamorous Client: Implications for Competent Practice
    fSuggested APA style reference information can be found at http://www.counseling.org/knowledge-center/vistas Article 50 Counseling the Polyamorous Client: Implications for Competent Practice Adrianne L. Johnson Johnson, Adrianne L., is an Assistant Professor of Clinical Mental Health Counseling at Wright State University. Her experience includes adult outpatient, crisis, college, and rehabilitation counseling. She has presented internationally on a broad range of counseling and counselor education topics, and her research interests include bias and diversity in counseling and counselor education. Abstract The self-reports of polyamorous clients regarding therapeutic experiences raise concerns for the counseling field. Many poly individuals are not receiving quality mental health care or relationship counseling because of valid fears regarding professional bias and condemnation of their lifestyle choices. The unique issues and concerns of polyamorous clients is an emerging interest in the mental health field and counselors have an ethical obligation to understand, explore, and address the unique needs of this population. Introduction The current culture in the United States has historically promoted heterosexual monogamy as the most widely accepted and advocated ethical/moral relationship option available, and clients identifying as polyamorous often practice covertly and with great stress “due to the cultural pressure, social stigmas, or fear of legal ramifications” (Black, 2006, p. 1). Polyamory is a lifestyle in which a person may have more than one romantic relationship with consent and support expressed for this choice by each of the people concerned (Weitzman, 2006, p. 139). Polyamorous people face stigmatization, stereotypes, negative bias, and marginalization in both the mainstream society and in the offices of counseling professionals.
    [Show full text]